Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Emergency Management) Share this | Hansard source

I think it's pretty clear what's on display this morning: two contrasting approaches to a serious public policy issue. One was on display in the contributions from Senator Cash and Senator McKenzie, which were full of mistruths, misstatements about the actual facts on the ground and the steps taken by this government, and misunderstandings about the policy levers that are in fact available to government—the ones that would be effective and the ones that would make the problem worse. That was evident in the alleged solution proposed by Senator Cash, which would indeed make this problem worse and would do nothing to resolve the serious public policy issues that are at play in this debate.

As Senator Watt has already pointed out, there is some irony that the stunt being pursued this morning by Senator Cash is displacing time allocated for a debate on women's gender equality at work—the debate that should be taking place at this time. And it's for that reason, amongst other things, that we oppose this suspension.

The allegations that were aired of corruption, thuggery, violence—they are sickening, and they are disturbing. There is zero tolerance for criminal behaviour or for gender based violence in any industry. I want to say this clearly: every worker deserves a safe workplace free from violence, free from intimidation and free from thuggery. But the real question to be asked for those opposite is what would be effective in confronting it? All of the things that were done when you were in government were plainly ineffective. The challenges which have built up in this industry built up under the supposed oversight of the body that you champion as the solution to these problems, and it is deeply revealing that you continue to champion those solutions even in the face of all of the evidence that they did not work.

We have taken a very different approach. From the very beginning, we took firm steps because, for us, this matters. It actually does matter that there is a good union in this sector—a clean union, a union capable of standing up for workers' interests and a union capable of enforcing and supporting the safety standards that are so critical for people working on building sites. It matters to ordinary Australians that a good, effective, clean and orderly union does operate in this sector. We're determined to stamp out those behaviours that we have seen that are entirely inconsistent with those values. We can't tolerate thuggery. We can't tolerate corruption. We can't tolerate the involvement of organised crime in this sector. Putting this organisation under the control of an administrator is an incredibly important step. It's a step that has allowed investigations to take place to uncover some of these behaviours.

It stands in contrast to the proposal from the opposition to put this organisation into deregistration. As the minister has already pointed out, what do people think that that will do? It will remove them from the oversight, the controls and the constraints that exist on any registered organisation. It'll remove them from oversight by the Fair Work Commission, remove them from all of the obligations that attend to a registered organisation and, as the minister has said, hand the keys back to John Setka. That is not an outcome that we are willing to tolerate. I am deeply surprised that it's an outcome that those on the other side are willing to contemplate and to advocate for. This is no solution whatsoever. It does nothing to deal with the challenges of the industry. It does nothing to restore the orderly operation of a clean union in this sector. It is a stunt, and it is a stunt that, on the occasion of today and today's program, displaces our opportunity to deal with a piece of legislation that actually promotes women's gender equality in the workplace.