Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

With so many speakers contributing to the debate on the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Administration) Bill 2024, I've been sitting here wondering which particular angle to take. I was here for the speech made by Senator Scarr. I hadn't heard the story of Ben before, and it was truly horrifying to hear that a young worker—a young Indigenous Australian—went to work, came home and, apparently, chose to take his own life because of the bullying he received on site for having had a previous employer that the CFMEU didn't like and for wearing the wrong shirt.

I can't help but think about the difference in perspective. If this were an employer who bullied a young worker for having a T-shirt on and locked them in a shed for hours and that worker then took their own life because of that, there would be calls from the other side for industrial manslaughter charges. There would be cries for tougher laws and for actually criminalising the directors of the company and criminalising the worksite. We would not hear anything but how unjust it is. But, with the CFMEU, we hear, 'Nothing to see here.' That's sad because we have to have standards that apply equally to all Australians in all circumstances.

I hadn't heard that story. I saw Senator Scarr's difficulty telling it. I saw him almost breaking up. I heard the mother talking about how she put her son to bed and that he was excited about a job one day, concerned the next afternoon and dead the next morning, because he wore the wrong T-shirt. If that's the power that enables you to do that sort of bullying—locking people in sheds—that creates a situation where people take their own life, without any ramifications, that is too much power. No-one in this chamber would say it is not.

I have very limited experience with this union, but a friend of mine did take me into their home. They were building a development in the Hunter, and they showed me onsite footage of two union members coming on site. One of them assaulted the site manager, and it was captured on video. They couldn't do anything about it. Nothing was a problem until the union found out that they had footage of it, and then the threats came: 'You won't get another employee on site. You won't pass safety checks. There'll be an electrical issue. You won't get final clearance. All of these things will happen if you go to the police, if you tell anyone or if you do anything.' So I was specifically told: 'Don't do anything. Please don't do anything. I need this to go ahead or I'm broke.' That is the power of a union that is out of control.

A lot of senators on this side have given Minister Watt a hard time for this action that he has taken in introducing this legislation. But, let's face it, he has been given an impossible task: 'Make it look to the Australian people that you're tough on the CFMEU. Make it look like we're doing something and make it look like we're taking a stand but without actually doing anything, without really taking steps to clean things up and without annoying the CFMEU enough that they'll start talking about what they're doing, about where their donations have gone, about how they have done these things and about who is a recipient of benefits from these actions.' So poor old Minister Watt is treading a fine line. He is walking a tight rope with this legislation: 'Make it look like we're doing something without actually doing anything.' That is the legislation we have before us.

One in three of the previous speakers mentioned the 20 amendments that the coalition is proposing. They're not secret. They're not hidden. They were put in a press release on 13 August, and the previous speaker went through them. They are reasonable. I don't think they go far enough in relation to a union that has caused such harm to individuals, such destruction to businesses and such harm to the taxpayer by inflating the cost of doing everything, especially in the state of Victoria. But they are there, and, if they are met, I will vote for the bill because it is something. But let's go back to that idea: 'Don't go so hard that the union turns rat on us.' Anyone looking at Mr Setka and seeing the tattoo he has around his neck will know: he is no rat. You can go harder because he won't turn. He has been a loyal soldier hiding secrets for the Labor Party for ever, and he won't turn now. You can go harder, and Australia needs you to go harder.

This is not about punishing the perpetrators of this behaviour that takes lives, closes businesses and threatens people. It is about silencing the witnesses. It is about coming to a deal where those that have perpetrated these acts do not stand up and say, 'A did this; B did this.' And I'm not just talking about politicians; I'm talking about the businesses that paid these bribes, the ones that are big enough to get away with doing it so that the small family businesses and the medium-sized businesses can't compete. They are all wrong, and this is when we get to the size of organisations. This is why Senator Lambie and people on this side all wanted a change of regulation on industrial relations—to be able to allow unions to separate from the CFMEU. That's why the government didn't allow it initially. 'Big' is best when it comes to oversight: big business, big corporations, big donations, big unions.

If we had an organisation like this operating in America, it would fall under the RICO Act since 1970. A business with a large number of people representing it that commit a large number of crimes would fall under the RICO Act, and the whole thing would be shut down. But we don't have that in Australia. I get how important unions are for safety. I get how important unions are for worker welfare. I get how important they are for pay and conditions. But I get how attractive they are to infiltrate for those that don't have those interests at heart. I get how easy they are for people who have their own interests at heart to infiltrate them to seek to control them.

It is a strange path I go down now. I was state director of the National Party in 2018-2019 when the far right signed up a number of people over time and they all showed up together for the first time at an annual general conference. We got a phone call that morning saying: 'There are a bunch of people here we don't know. What do you know?' Strangely enough, I thought we were being taken over by the Liberal Party because I didn't know who they were. But, after some research over about two days, we found out who they were. As the leader, as the state director, of the party, it was my responsibility to get them out. We didn't hide it. I'm still criticised to this day for being open and clear and allowing what we were doing to go on the front page of the paper. There were 32 people from extreme right-wing organisations—and we were open with the White Rose Foundation; we were open with the Jewish Board of Deputies—and we wanted them in no part of our party, because they sought to legitimise their own interests by taking over our brand and value. A leader does that.

I feel, with the CFMEU, the leadership has allowed this to happen—people without the best interests of their workers or of their members. They don't want their members' problems; they want their union dues. They want their superannuation. They want their vote. They want everything but their problems, and they want to control them. That a bill like this, which comes in without detail, without checks and balance and without KPIs, which is so common in government now—no KPIs on anything; 'Let's have our best shot and see how it goes!'—will do that is wrong. The 20 amendments are there. That will put some teeth behind this. I know that the real members, the real builders, the real Labor Party members, who support unionisation and the construction union doing the right thing by its members, will back this. They don't want an organisation that is controlled by those that don't have their members' best interests at heart. And it doesn't. It is all about control. Those seeking to control the world know that they have lost the argument. They can't win on merit. They can't win on facts. They have to have absolute control of every part of their lives. They have to control the worksites. They have to control the contractors. They have to control who can visit and who can't because, if it goes to the market, if there is a free bid, they will lose that control and they will have nothing. So this isn't about whether this union is to big or too small or violent; it's about the absolute control they have over everything.

Remember the words from Senator Scarr. Remember the words from Ben's mother. He wore the wrong T-shirt to work, got locked in a shed, was bullied, was punished and took his own life that night because he couldn't face it. That is the control that the CFMEU want. That is the control they have.

I feel sorry for the attendants, who have had to walk around with, I think, about 20 or 30 pieces of paper for the amendments that are going to be put to the vote today. There are so many of them because this bill has to have teeth because the bad elements in this union have total control and they have to be put in a box—not locked in a shed like Ben. The bad people have to be forced out, put in a box and eradicated from this union.

So when we are voting, I say to the minister and I say to those opposite, be bold. Stand up for what's right. The National Party, when I was getting rid of the far right, got front pages of the paper that I wish we never had. But it was the only way to force out those who sought to do evil to our organisation. Have the boldness and the strength to say: 'These people are not what the union needs. These people are not who the labour movement wants representing them.' Don't stop until they are all gone. Be open, be honest and be bold because Ben deserves nothing less, because the Australian people deserve nothing less and because it is time.

Let's get down to the facts here. When you create an environment where evil can flourish, it does. The ABCC was removed, we moved guidelines and we changed laws. In this place, through the laws we passed, we created the environment for this to happen, and, if we aren't taking responsibility for fixing it, we—not just the union—are failing the Australian people. So don't look at what we're doing now as a bandaid, because it won't stem all the blood. As my ex-surgeon wife says, all bleeding stops eventually for some reason. Let's make it stop not because we didn't tend to the wound. Let's make it stop because we fixed the wound.

So whenever this comes to a vote—this afternoon, next week, in the future—there is a choice: to do what looks good in a press release or to take the first step in what it takes to build a better country. We need to bring back the ABCC, we need to create an atmosphere where this can never happen again in any other union or any other organisation and we have to reward those organisations that do get infiltrated but stand up to it. We've seen the strength of the manufacturing side, wanting to break away from this union for so long. Up in the Hunter Valley, the mining side managed to escape the grasp of this union because they had their workers' interests at heart, not that of their organised thug group, the CFMEU.

When we move forward beyond this, we have to look at laws that create a competitive building industry, rewarding the small and medium-sized businesses that want to come in and have a stake and do things more efficiently than the big guys that have all fallen into line with what's going on down there, who have been complicit.

Everyone brings up the $6.2 million worth of donations since the current Prime Minister became Leader of the Labor Party. We don't want that returned; they shouldn't get that money back. It should instead be donations to charities and for people in need, for people in distress and at risk of suicide—to help people who are bullied like Ben. That's where that money should go. But it won't. It'll be kept. It'll be used to get more people elected to support the CFMEU. It'll be used for many things that that money's not meant to be used for, because when you get down to it here everything comes down to money. There's money in control and there's money in superannuation and there's money in union fees and there's money in bribes. If we start putting money above our country, if we start putting money above the lives of the workers in the construction industry, we have lost and we should pack up and go home.