Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is a bit better than the award rate—you're right, Senator Smith. I want my superannuation fund to have people who know what they're doing. Whilst I love Senator Cameron—and I'll live to regret that statement, I might say, but he is a nice fellow—when he did his fitter apprenticeship, he joined a company that immediately went broke and then he spent seven years as a maintenance fitter. I'm not quite sure how that qualifies him to deal with high finance. I'm sure he was a very good fitter. Fitting and turning is a very noble and honourable profession. It's not easy in some instances. I have a nephew who has chosen that trade. They're experts at fitting and turning. I wouldn't have thought they're experts at high finance around the world. That's one issue: directors are not there to represent everyone; they're there to get a good return for the money that contributors invest in the superannuation fund.

The other thing that concerns me about the background that has necessitated this bill is that I understand, and there is factual evidence, that over the last 10 years the so-called industry superannuation funds have contributed $53 million of members' money—I repeat that: $53 million of members' money—to the union movement or to the ALP. It is documented, of course, that the money that goes to a union from sources like this does a sort of round-robin circle: it goes to the unions and it's then immediately paid to the ALP to fund election campaigns and to try to keep them in power with their tentacles. So $53 million of contributions have gone to the unions over the last 10 years. Is that accountable? Is that transparent? Why would a superannuation fund be donating $53 million to the unions? Those unions that receive that money then make equally generous donations to the Labor Party, who then use it to try and win elections—and they're pretty good at that.

I wondered when my Queensland colleagues from the Labor Party spoke on this whether they hadn't been given the gee-up by the unions in Queensland running up to the Queensland state election, because I do know that most of the campaign workers for the Labor Party in the Queensland election are not branch members of the ALP, if there is any such a thing—unlike my party. The people working on the booths for my party are actually branch members—ordinary mums and dads, young people, students and retirees out there because they believe in a cause. But I know through experience in just the last few weeks and over many years that the people running the booths for the Labor Party are—would you believe it?—the union organisers, the union heavies, in every state. They are not only from across the state of Queensland; they ship them in from Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia or wherever to man the pre-poll booths and man the booths on the day. There are very few local people, ever, at the booths in Townsville. They're all visiting unionists. We know the one or two local unionists. We know the one or two people locally who are Labor Party members, but there's not many of them. Most of them are people shipped in by the union movement.

I just wonder if the reason that Senator Ketter and Senator Watt are here trying to retain the influence of these union heavies in their board positions on these superannuation funds is they've been given by the union people in Queensland a bit of a hurry up: 'Look, if you guys want us to work for you on the booths, you'd better get into the Senate. Here's a speech we've written for you. You can go and deliver that and say how terrible it would be if this superannuation arrangement was changed.' You could see the passion in Senator Watt's speech on how he wants to retain that privilege for a few union heavies. I repeat: they're not representing the workers, because the unions only represent 10 per cent of the workers—10 per cent! So they're not even representing the workers. They're representing the union heavies, they're representing the ALP and they're representing that privileged group that believe they have a God-given right to be able to interfere with the running of a country or, in the case of Queensland, a state.

I'd like someone to explain where the $53 million from superannuation contributors went. I know it went to the unions, but why? Why would a superannuation fund be making donations to a union? We know that all the unions are there for these days is simply to shovel money through the Labor Party to try and win elections and to keep them in the positions of power and privilege that they currently hold in the state of Queensland and elsewhere around Australia. If there are any more Labor speakers in the debate, it would be interesting for them to indicate why superannuation companies would contribute some $53 million of contributors' money to the unions. Perhaps there is a reason. I've never heard it explained.

The fact sheet is littered with those sorts of things. Charis Mullen has been a director on the board of AusSafe since October 2013, following her nomination by the Australian Workers' Union of Employees, Queensland. She's the campaign coordinator for the AWU's Queensland branch, and she is now the Labor Party candidate for the seat of Jordan in the upcoming election. AustSafe, the superannuation fund of which she's a director, has paid more than $305,000 of members' money to trade unions over the past decade. Why? I would be interested if any Labor speaker could explain that.

Gary Bullock has been chair of the Intrust Super board since earlier this year. He is the state secretary of United Voice and honorary treasurer of the Queensland Council of Unions. Mr Bullock is on public record about United Voice supporting seven successful ALP candidates in the 2015 state election, going so far as to call them 'the United Voice MPs'. I have to say, with some dismay, that they include the current member—not for long, I hope and expect—for Mundingburra, Ms Coralee O'Rourke, who, according to reports, had her living expenses leading up to the 2015 election paid for by United Voice. Where did United Voice get that money from? Perhaps they got it from that donation from the Intrust Super board. One would be interested to find out why Intrust would have paid—I am told—some $618,000 of members' money to trade unions over the past decade.

Time, unfortunately, doesn't allow me to go through a series of these examples. I see Senator Watt has rejoined the debate, which is good to see. I'd be interested, Senator Watt, to know if you were ever a director of a—