Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

It's not the Australian voters I'm talking about, Senator Smith—you're right. It is about the people who pull the strings, who put the Labor Party here, who determine their preselections, who determine who the Labor Party candidates are: the union puppet-masters. They choose each and every one of those who sit opposite. Whether they come from a union background or not, in the end, they have to get the endorsement of the trade union movement to be able to be the Labor Party candidate, to even get on the ballot paper before they get to this place.

That is, of course, why we are seeing such a reaction from those opposite. Why is that, though? Why, you would have to ask, would they want to stand up for a bunch of lawbreaking officials who undermine the integrity of good union officials who do good work? That is the thing—there are many good, decent union officials full of integrity. I met with some last week, at Senator Farrell's instigation. I am more than happy to acknowledge that the trade union movement has good people in it, but they are brought down by the dodgy operators and by the lawbreakers who think that it is just the price of doing business to break the law consistently. That is, of course, what the CFMMEU does so consistently—$16½ million dollars in CFMMEU fines have been levelled over recent years. And what is the reaction of the CFMMEU? 'It's just the price of doing business.' They pay the fines, and they keep breaking the law. That is what happens. That is the attitude they take. That is why we have brought these reforms to bear.

There is a cost to that lawbreaking activity. That cost is that construction activity in Australia costs a damn sight more than it should because of the disruptive behaviour of the unions. Indeed, estimates are that construction project costs have been driven up by around 30 per cent thanks to the lawbreaking activities of certain trade union leaders and certain trade unions. That is why we are cracking down on this. The current penalty regime clearly does not provide a deterrent to those who think they can just keep breaking the law. They think the answer is: 'We'll break the law. We'll keep breaking the law. We'll pay the fines. It doesn't matter.' We are creating a new penalty regime to make sure we change that behaviour—to encourage people simply to abide by the existing law of the land. That is what this is.

This is not some great, big, new workplace relations reform, despite what those opposite are suggesting. It is not that at all. It is a measure to simply try to get unions to comply with the existing laws. That is all it is seeking to do: trying to get trade unions to comply with the existing laws. It is a measure that we took to the last election as a government. It is a measure we introduced into the House of Representatives way back in July. It is a measure that has been before a Senate inquiry, which received 67 written submissions and had 78 different witnesses appear before it. There has been lots of scrutiny, and now we are bringing it to this chamber to debate it, and those opposite hysterically oppose even having the debate.

Well, our government is proud to bring this on for debate. We are proud to respect the democratic processes of this country by giving the Senate extra time to debate this legislation. We are determined to also make sure that other people in this country have respect for the law of the land, have respect for our existing workplace relations laws, and that we actually have all of those in the workplace relations systems operating to those laws because the penalties are sufficient to encourage them to do just that. (Time expired)