Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Withdrawal from Amalgamation) Bill 2024. I have to say that the irony of this legislation does not escape those on the coalition side of this chamber, the reason being that this was the law, in part, that we introduced when we were last in government in 2020. That's right: it was the former coalition government that listened to constituent parts of unions that no longer wanted to be part of the militant, thuggish, bullying CFMMEU, and we allowed them, should they choose to, to put in place a process whereby they demerged. In other words: they got out of the part of the union which was bullying, intimidating and indulging in thuggery.

At the time, on Wednesday 9 December 2020, the now Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Tony Burke, in a speech in the House of Representatives, supported the coalition's legislation on behalf of the then Labor opposition. I have the speech here. There's not often a time and place in which the Labor opposition will support the coalition when it comes to changes to industrial relations. So, when they do, you've got to look at it and go, 'Wow, the coalition really did get it right.' And that we did. Why? Because we listened to those workers, those members of bigger unions, who said: 'We are sick and tired. We are fed up with the bullying, the thuggery and the intimidation. We want to properly represent our workers, and the only way that we're able to do that is if we demerge from the larger union.'

Let's have a look at what Tony Burke, the now minister for industrial relations, said at the time. He said:

The bill before us—

that was, of course, the coalition's bill—

represents a commonsense technical amendment to the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009—specifically the provisions in the act that deal with withdrawal from amalgamation. Currently the act allows a constituent part of an amalgamated union to withdraw from the remainder of the union. It's a democratic process involving a ballot of the members of that part of the union that would be seeking to withdraw from the amalgamation. The problem with the provisions as they currently exist—

in other words, what the coalition was seeking to fix and, indeed, did fix—

is that they only provide a window of between two and five years after an amalgamation in which a vote of that kind can take place. It's a narrow window that doesn't contemplate the possibility that the desire for a demerger and the reasons for a demerger may arise after that five-year window.

You probably now need to ask yourself, 'Hold on. If Mr Burke, when he was the opposition spokesperson on industrial relations, was prepared to support a coalition bill that did, within reason, what this bill is doing today, how have we actually ended up in this place whereby we are re-legislating something that the coalition had put in place.' That's because, as we know, after the Labor then opposition supported our legislation, they got a knock on the door, and, lo and behold, who did they get a knock on the door from? That would of course be from the person whom many of the courts, including the High Court of Australia, have made some rather interesting comments about. That is Mr John Setka, who has been named, 'The most bullish thug in Australia when it comes to standing over other people.' The problem the Labor Party then had was that what Mr Setka says, has to go.

As such, in the 2021 Special Platform Conference, the Australian Labor Party did a complete, total and utter backflip. They went from supporting what Mr Burke had said was, 'A commonsense technical amendment,' because as I said, the then coalition government had been talking to the workers, in particular in the textile unions. The textile division of the CFMEU had told us, 'Please, we have to get out of the CFMEU. They intimidate us, they bully us, they are thugs, and we need to be able to get out.' So we allowed them that pathway to get out, which, at the time, Mr Burke supported.

Knock on the door, it's Mr Setka of the CFMEU, different marching instructions are given. We also know there was the small figure, I say sarcastically, of $4.3 million, which the CFMEU provided to the Australian Labor Party in the lead up to the 2022 election. So we saw a complete, total and utter backflip, and in the 2021 Special Platform Conference, this is what the Australian Labor Party outlined in relation to what there 'further industrial relations policies' were to include:

Union demerger reform—reversing the Morrison union demerger government's legislative changes that make it easier for unions to demerge.

One might ask, 'On what planet would the Australian Labor Party have to take that as a policy in its platform to the election when only 12 months before, they proudly stood in both the other place and this place, supporting legislation that Mr Burke himself described as merely a commonsense technical amendment to the Fair Work Act to allow those parts of unions who didn't want to be part of a bigger union, to actually leave?' As I said, it is right there in back and white. They had to reverse their position with a spectacular backflip because Mr Setka, in Mr Setka style, stood over the Australian Labor Party.

We know that is true, and why do we know that is true? Because since they reversed the coalition's very sensible legislation, the textile union and representatives of the textile union have been walking this place, and they have been quite rightly speaking to anyone who will listen and telling them about the issues that they have with, in particular, the militant division of the CFMEU—the construction division—and actually begging for the ability to demerge from them. In fact, one of the union secretaries told the Age newspaper about the first meeting with the CFMEU:

"It was a male-dominated space," she recalls. "He just went on this big rant and there was fear if anyone tried to say anything it would have just got a lot worse."

Wow! That's a great way to treat low-paid women from a part of the union that can't afford to give a lot of money to the Australian Labor Party. You just leave them there to be bullied and intimidated by thugs, and you say, 'Well, that's okay.' As long as the $4.3 million was coming in prior to the last election, John Setka—guess what, mate—what you say goes.

One of the other union reps stated, in regard to the workplace culture of the CFMEU—let's be very clear here; these are people who are members of the union. This is what they have been saying to the Australian Labor Party:

Within the building there were jokes about domestic violence. It was very uncomfortable to the point where our division had to leave the building.

Clearly, that doesn't worry the Australian Labor Party, as they were happy in February of this year to vote against both an amendment to their industrial relations legislation and a private senator's bill that Senator Lambie brought forward—both were supported by the coalition opposition—that would actually allow the textile division of the CFMEU, the manufacturers, to demerge from the bigger union. Why? Because we believe in freedom of association. It's something that those on the other side are fundamentally opposed to.

If you believe in freedom of association, you actually stand up for the low-paid women in the textile division—the textile, clothing and footwear sector—of the CFMEU. You listen to what, frankly, are completely, totally and utterly abhorrent complaints in relation to the CFMEU, and you then act on them. Twice earlier this year, the Australian Labor Party was given the opportunity to do just that. Both times, instead of standing up for the low-paid workers in the textile, clothing and footwear sector of the CFMEU—it has the greatest number of women—they did the bidding of John Setka.

In 2019 there was an affidavit provided, a sworn statement to the police, by Mr Setka's estranged wife. This is what she said, in relation to when Mr Setka had physically assaulted her:

John was out of control. He hit my head against the table about five times. It was very painful. John is a lot bigger and stronger than me and he can totally physically control me.

Again, the Labor Party did not listen to the pleas from, in particular, the women in the textile, clothing and footwear sector of the CFMEU and twice did not support the ability for them to get out of the CFMEU. In fact, in relation to Senator Lambie's bill, Senator Watt made it very clear. Senator Watt gave the position on behalf of the Albanese Labor government. He said, 'The government will not be supporting this bill.' So you really have to ask yourself: how did we get to this place today? The answer is very obvious. Mr Albanese has shown that he is a weak and impotent Prime Minister, in his inability to stand up to the bullying, thuggery and intimidation that Mr Setka is still throwing around.