Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I take the interjection from Senator Bilyk. Unfortunately, the ABS has been crippled by staff cuts and funding cuts. Let us not worry about these dodgy reports that are being held up by the government to justify their actions and let us look at what the Australian Bureau of Statistics says. They say that in the seven years before the introduction of the ABCC, construction industry productivity increased more than it did in the seven years that the ABCC existed. Last time around, far from the ABCC lifting productivity in the construction industry—which is what we are continually told by government ministers is what happened and will happen again if these bills are passed—the evidence shows that, last time we had ABCC, construction industry productivity fell. It only turned the corner and only started improving once Labor, upon its election, got rid of the ABCC. In fact, productivity has been higher every year since the abolition of the ABCC in 2012.

I say to the crossbenchers, as they are making up their minds about how to vote on this legislation, do not believe the government when they say to you that this is the key to unlocking construction industry productivity. The evidence is there. We do not need the dodgy reports that have been put together by consultants to tell us what may or may not happen. Let us just look at what happened last time we had this ABCC. The Australian Bureau of Statistics very clearly says, and it has the statistics to back it up, that productivity fell the last time we had an ABCC and construction industry productivity improved when the ABCC was gotten rid of by the Labor government. If anyone is actually serious about lifting productivity and the construction industry, then the best way to do that is to make sure that we do not have an ABCC.

Not only does this legislation damage Australia economically but it also increases the safety risks for the men and women working in the construction industry. In my former life as a lawyer, at one of Australia's leading law firms that acts for working people and their unions, I heard too many stories about everyday working Australians who went to work and then never came home. That was the daily bread and butter of the law firm that I acted for. It was representing people who had either been horrifically injured or killed in workplace accidents. Unfortunately, again, the evidence shows that this ABCC, if reintroduced, will actually lead to an increase in workplace accidents. Ordinary working people in Australia will suffer the consequences if this bill goes through.

Let us look at what happened last time. From 2003 to 2013, 401 construction workers died from workplace injuries. Prior to the introduction of the ABCC, the fatality rate for workers within the construction industry was falling. When the ABCC was introduced in 2005, the fatality rate was 3.51 fatalities per 100,000 workers. In 2006, one year after the ABCC was introduced, the fatality rate increased to 4.7 and it again increased to 4.73 in 2007. Two years running after the ABCC was introduced, workplace accidents increased. Again, the evidence is there. The ABCC, last time around, drove down productivity in the construction industry and drove up accidents in the workplace, which actually affects people's lives.

The fatality rate exceeded the 2005 rate every year until 2012, when the ABCC was replaced. Every year that we had the ABCC in existence, the fatality rate of construction workers on the worksite increased. It was only when the ABCC was taken away in 2012 that that fatality rate decreased. Anyone who wants to hold themselves out as being a guardian of the rights of working people, have a think about that: when we did not have an ABCC, people were actually safer in the workplace than they were when we did. That is very easy to explain: it is because the ABCC inevitably will be used to restrict the rights of unions to enter workplaces, to stand up for safety breaches and to take action against employers who are not doing the right thing on safety. If we take where unions' rights to do that, then the people who will suffer are the average working people on those construction sites. I think that is shameful.

The safety of workers will also be compromised by the building code that is going to accompany this bill. That building code will apply to construction sites that receive government funding. I will not go into detail about the effects of that because of lack of time. But there will be all sorts of restrictions placed around building projects that are being funded by the government, which will make it even harder to force companies to hire local workers and to invest in training local people. It will, as I say, lead to very big changes to people's working hours, extending their working weeks, in industries that are inherently dangerous and it will expose people to unsafe working conditions.

One of the other arguments that we hear often from government ministers, as to why we need an ABCC, is that it is the only way to rein in the big, bad unions that are disrupting workplaces all around the country. Again, the facts do not support what the government is saying. Apart from one quarter in September 2012, which was a bit of an aberration, working days lost to industrial action per 1,000 workers are now lower than they were in the time of the ABCC. Again, let us look at the facts and let us look at what happened last time. Last time when we had an ABCC, productivity went down, workplace accidents went up and industrial disputation went up as well. On every ground that this government puts forward for why we need the ABCC, the facts do not back them up. I can only assume this is because we really have entered the era of post-fact politics. This government does not really seem to care too much about what the facts demonstrate as long as it fits their ideological obsession with taking away the rights of trade unions and working people.

The last point I would like to make is that this legislation is not only economically counterproductive, dangerous to working people and dangerous to the economy in the sense of increased industrial disputes but it is downright undemocratic. If the ABCC is re-established, it will have coercive powers that will compel workers to be subject to secret interviews and workers will be denied legal representation. What other situation is there in this country where we have legislation that denies working people their legal rights in this way—that makes them subject to secret interviews and denies them legal representation? Many unions have pointed out that people charged with serious criminal offences sometimes have more rights and more legal representation than union members and union officials will have if this ABCC is re-established. Nicola McGarrity and Professor George Williams, from the Faculty of Law at the University of New South Wales, say:

… the ABC Commissioner's investigatory powers have the potential to severely restrict basic democratic rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of association, the privilege against self-incrimination and the right to silence.

I remember the days when we had a Liberal Party in this country which stood up for those kinds of values of liberal democracy and those sorts of basic rights, but, unfortunately, those values have gone out the window under this government.

In conclusion, let us not pretend that this legislation is anything but what it is—thinly veiled union bashing. It is an attack on the organising bodies that working people have long relied on to protect themselves from governments like this. This government has form. Every time it gets into power it tries to take away union rights and working rights, and it is doing it again now. (Time expired)