Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm perplexed: Senator Ciccone, who I have a very high regard for, talked about a concern for costs. I'll quote him: he said, 'Each extra dollar government spends is becoming more expensive.' And I agree—I agree: each extra dollar that government spends is becoming more expensive. So I'm perplexed as to why it is, at the start of this government, that it's taking action to first gut the powers of the Australian Building and Construction Commission and then to abolish the Australian Building and Construction Commission, which is the cop on the beat of our construction sites across this country. If you want to save costs, if you want to maximise every single dollar of government infrastructure spending to build our hospitals, to build our schools and to build our roads, you need a cop on the beat in terms of our construction sites.

I want to quote a release put out by the Australian Industry Group this week. The title is, 'Gutting of Building Code'—and that is what the industrial relations minister is proposing to do—'a backwards step for safety and the fight against bullying & intimidation.' And I quote Innes Willox, the chief executive of national employer association Australian Industry Group. These are his words not mine. He said:

It is a backwards step for the fight against bullying and intimidation and will add costs—

the costs which, apparently, the government's so concerned about—

and delays to vital community infrastructure—

the community infrastructure which is to be provided for the people of this country—

such as roads, hospitals and schools.

That's what's being proposed. And the issue we're dealing with is the unlawful activity of the CFMMEU on our construction sites.

Mr Acting Deputy President Sterle, I know you were a proud member, and no doubt still are, of a trade union in this country. My father was a member of a trade union. My mother was a member of a trade union. My sister was a member of a trade union. I have great respect for Senator Walsh, sitting opposite, who was a senior official of United Voice union. I have a great respect for many members sitting opposite who have held senior positions in the Australian labour movement. But I do not have respect for the lawless activity undertaken by the CFMMEU on construction sites in this country, and I am baffled as to why the Australian Labor Party wants to protect the construction division of the CFMMEU, absolutely baffled.

I'm going to refer to a number of very confronting incidents that the CFMMEU has engaged with on construction sites. Bear in mind, the Australian government, the Labor government, is saying, 'We don't need a cop on the beat,' on our construction sites. Just listen to this roll call of shame, of the conduct of the CFMMEU on our construction sites, and you be the judge. Let all those listening be the judge as to whether or not there's an issue, in terms of the unlawful behaviour of the CFMMEU. Some of these examples are confronting. As someone who's dealt in a previous life with trade unionists, the trade union movement, I don't think they're representative of 99 per cent of the trade union movement. The issue is we've got a problem, in this country, with the construction division of the CFMMEU.

Let me give you some examples. A CFMMEU official was jailed for assault. He had once told a female inspector—this is a woman working on our construction sites. I think we should be promoting our construction sites as a place for women to work. This is what he said to that lady, someone's wife, someone's daughter, someone's niece. He said she was an '—expletive, expletive—' asking her if she had brought kneepads, as 'You are going to be—expletive, expletive, expletive—dogs all day.' We don't have a problem in our construction work sites with the CFMMEU?

Here is another example. The Courier Mail, a paper in my state, revealed that a CFMMEU official allegedly barked like a dog at a female health and safety consultant on a Gold Coast construction site and said, 'Go on, off you go you—expletive—dog—expletive. Go get your police.' He allegedly called her an '—expletive—dog—expletive—' twice more that day. We don't have a problem on our constructive sites? We don't have a problem with the CFMMEU?

You see, the Australian Labor Party—in the minister's announcement, when he said he was going to gut the ABCC of its watchdog powers, with respect to our construction sites, he couldn't even bear to mention the CFMMEU. He didn't even mention their names. They are ashamed of the CFMMEU. Yet officials of the CFMMEU sit around their national executive table and donate millions and millions and millions of dollars to those sitting opposite and their political causes.

I'll give you another example. It just gets worse—and I've got pages of this stuff. It is appalling. In another visit, a female inspector was called an '—expletive, expletive—' and 'a dog' by union officials while she was doing her job. How's this one? A CFMMEU delegate was accused of harassing the daughter of a builder—so not just the person on the construction site, their family!

I've actually spoken to people working in construction sites who've had to live with the stress created by CFMMEU construction officials trespassing and unlawfully invading construction sites and taking photographs of their cars' plates—the number plates on their personal vehicles. That's the sort of thing the CFMMEU construction division does, and you're defending them. It's disgraceful. You can't even mention their name—in this case, the builder's daughter.

You have heard our Prime Minister say: 'It's all trivial. It's all about the stickers and flags.' No, it's not. It's about someone's daughter, it's about someone's wife, it's about someone's niece. This is what happened to her. The CFMMEU picketers were accused of harassing the daughter of the builder when she entered the site in her car by commenting on her breasts and bottom and making an 'ooh' sounded her. They allegedly called her a daddy's girl, a blonde bimbo, et cetera. Here's another case: a CFMMEU official made three phone calls late at night to a female inspector's mobile phone. The last call logged at 11.23 pm. An anonymous flyer was then circulated, referring to the woman as a dog who wanted to be a pole dancer. These are the cases—example after example after example.

What does our High Court say about the CFMMEU construction division? What does our High Court say? This judgement was released on 13 April 2022. Our High Court—not a politician; our High Court—was unanimous in a judgement. This is what our High Court said about the CFMMEU construction division:

… the Full Court's approach in this case is apt to undermine the primacy of deterrence as the objective of the civil penalty regime in the Act is amply demonstrated once regard is had to the failure of previous penalties to have any deterrent effect on the CFMMEU's repeated contraventions of s 349(1) of the Act. The … CFMMEU has continued to breach s 349(1), steadfastly resistant to previous attempts to enforce compliance by civil penalties fixed at less than the permitted maximum, is a compelling indication that the penalties previously imposed have not been taken seriously because they were insufficient to outweigh the benefits flowing unlawfully to the contravenor from adherence to the "no ticket, no start" policy.

That is, the policy that they intimidate people off construction sites unless they are a member of the CFMMEU. Don't we believe in freedom of association in this country? This is what the High Court says:

To the contrary, the CFMMEU's continuing defiance of s 349(1) indicates that it regards the penalties previously imposed as an "acceptable cost of doing business".

Those opposite talk about cost. The CFMMEU regards breaching the laws of this land as a cost of doing business.

Why are you standing up and defending this lawless union which is a contaminant on our construction worksites? It baffles me. We will shine a bright light on the unlawful conduct of the CFMMEU, whose members sit on your national executive, every day until the next federal election.