Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Employment (Senator Abetz) and the Attorney-General (Senator Brandis) to questions without notice asked by Senators Conroy and Cameron today relating to the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption.

As senators would be aware, today's article in The Australian by Pamela Williams contains explosive revelations about the Abbott government's politically motivated trade union royal commission. We already knew that the Prime Minister's hand-picked royal commissioner, Dyson Heydon, had inexplicably agreed to speak at a Liberal Party function. In recent weeks, we have also come to learn that Dyson Heydon and Counsel Assisting Jeremy Stoljar failed to disclose that they were tipped off about the forthcoming media storm. And, most recently, we have seen the unedifying spectacle of Dyson Heydon finding himself, surprisingly, clear of potential bias.

If all of that were not enough to prove what Labor has been saying all along—that this royal commission is nothing more than a politically motivated witch-hunt set up by the Prime Minister to smear his political opponents—today's explosive revelations can leave nobody in doubt about the political motivations behind this royal commission and the biased behaviour of the royal commissioner and his staff. Thanks to the investigative journalism of Pamela Williams, we have learned today from the royal commission's own file notes—the royal commission's own documents—that the royal commission staff helped—coached, no less—Ms Kathy Jackson. This is a smoking gun. It fatally compromises this outrageous politically-motivated royal commission.

Instead of investigating trade union corruption, the supposed basis for this royal commission, today we have learned that the royal commission was protecting a corrupt witness, Kathy Jackson, to cover up her thefts—was protecting a corrupt witness to protect her from disclosure of her own corrupt stealing, rather than fulfilling its supposed mandate—

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, you've established it?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not have to establish anything, Senator, because a court of law in this land has found Kathy Jackson guilty of stealing $1.4 million. And this is what the royal commission did, instead of its job; it said: 'We're not going to investigate allegations against Kathy Jackson; we are going to give you, Ms Jackson, the opportunity to attack the people who made the allegations against you, which you have subsequently been proved guilty of.'

So let me be very clear about this: it is not simply Labor's contention that this outrageous witness-coaching took place; it is not even The Australian's contention. It is in black and white in the royal commission's own documentation.

Let me read directly from a file note of a telephone call between Kathy Jackson, Fiona Roughley and Matthew Ashworth. I am sure everyone in this chamber—especially Senator Abetz, who is a regular telephone correspondent with her—knows who she is. But the royal commission staff's own notes reveal that Ms Roughley told Kathy Jackson that the royal commission had obtained material relating to her slush fund. For those who are not aware, this innocuously named 'national health development account' is none other than her slush fund, that she raided for $284,000—plus the rest. And this is what was said, from the file note: 'The commission intends—

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Time! Time! Time!

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

to hold the hearing as there is a good chance—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator, your time has expired. Yes, thank you, Senator McKenzie; I was somewhat distracted.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Once again, Senator Conroy is true to form; he is long on balderdash and short on basic facts. He was short on very basic facts, because the facts are that the information that was provided to Kathy Jackson, as revealed in The Australian, is exactly the kind of information that was provided to other witnesses that have appeared at the royal commission as well.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Rubbish! Liar!

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy, you need to withdraw those comments.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy, I did not actually hear them myself, but I thank you for withdrawing. What Labor senators opposite have to prove in this debate is: why is it okay for some union witnesses to receive very detailed information on the topics and issues that they will be questioned about but apparently not okay for Ms Kathy Jackson to receive the same briefing before her appearance?

I actually have some basic facts to provide the Senate, unlike Senator Conroy. It looks like I will have time to actually do them, unlike Senator Conroy. There is a letter here from the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption, dated 7 April 2015, to Mr Steve Heathcote, who was a solicitor for the Transport Workers' Union of Australia. In that letter, it discusses the TWU's appearance before the commission on 11 May. I quote directly from it:

The Commission would be grateful if a statement from Mr Burton would be provided on the following topics: …

This letter in itself is more than a page long. I do not have time to read out all of the topics, but they go to the purchase of two Ford F350s in 2012-13. Senator Conroy was just saying there was some grand conspiracy over the identification of an account. This goes to the actual details of two cars purchased, as well as a redundancy payment to an individual. That is not the only basic fact that I would like to present during this debate.

There was another letter on 30 July 2014, again from the royal commission, to Mr Michael Doherty of Maurice Blackburn, a lawyer for TWU Australia. It goes to their appearance between 19 and 22 August 2014. Again, this letter is more than three pages long and details different issues that the royal commission would like to ask questions on, including the election of positions for the Flight Attendants' Association of Australia, and the receipt and expenditure of moneys by the McLean Forum Ltd and the election of positions of office to the TWU in 2010. This is standard procedure for the royal commission, and there is nothing special about this. What is special about this is the continuing attempt from the Labor Party to distract attention from the contemptible behaviour that some union officials have engaged in.

Another basic fact is that four officials connected to the CFMEU have been arrested. Twenty-six union and ex-union officials are currently under investigation by police around the country. They are basic facts. The Labor Party would have you believe that there is some grand conspiracy between the Prime Minister, the royal commission and the police forces in this country. Apparently the police forces in this country are engaged in a conspiracy among each other to distract attention from the otherwise good work of trade unions. I do think some trade unions do good work, but unfortunately there is a number—admittedly, it is a small number—of very bad apples that should be rooted out. Their behaviour should be exposed, and any decent political party in this country would join with this government, the police and the royal commission to make sure that those bad apples are gotten rid of so that the hardworking and genuine trade union members of this country can receive proper and non-corrupt representation from their officials.

But, apparently, the Labor Party with their continuing campaign of rolling out red herrings on this issue are not interested in that. They are not interested in protecting the hardworking union members that these organisations are meant to represent. They are only interested in protecting the officials and the perks that those officials can often provide. I wish the Labor Party had a different attitude, but clearly they do not.

In the limited time left available, I would like to say that a couple of weeks ago the police made a visit to some CFMEU offices. In response, CFMEU officials accused the police of being in hock to the royal commission and accused them of running a distraction campaign on behalf of the Prime Minister. What credible organisation in this country does not cooperate with police? What credible political party in this country defends people who do not cooperate with police?

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I always find it quite amusing when the coalition talk about workers and looking after workers and trade unionists. It always make me smile when I see these people, with a pedigree going back to Bjelke-Petersen in the National Party, spawned from the loins of the Bjelke-Petersen regime, stand up here and tell us they are going to look after working people and trade unionists in this country.

The reality is quite clear. The reality is that this royal commission is fundamentally flawed. It is fundamentally flawed because it was a political product of the coalition. It was a political product that was to be a clear attack on not only the trade union movement in this country but the Labor Party in this country. It is about attacking the opponents of the coalition. It is about using every aspect of the power of government against political opponents. That is what this government has done. Bjelke-Petersen did the same thing, but Bjelke-Petersen did it in a much more raw way. He did it in a much more blatant way. This coalition is trying to do it in a way that is a little bit more subtle.

So what do they do? They get Dyson Heydon, a former High Court judge who is one of the most conservative judges this country has ever seen, to head up a royal commission to attack the trade union movement and to attack the Labor Party. Dyson Heydon, only a few years back, was talking about it still being okay to rape your wife in marriage. That is the type of conservatism that this guy brought to the royal commission. He set about establishing procedures in the royal commission that looked after the biggest fraud and the biggest crook in the Australian trade union movement—Kathy Jackson. He looked after her, gave her special treatment and gave her inside running that was given to no other witness before this commission. Dyson Heydon is presiding over a crook royal commission. Dyson Heydon should go. The lawyers who are supporting Dyson Heydon should go. We should be establishing a proper inquiry. If there is evidence of any wrongdoing in the trade union movement, the people involved should be locked up and the key should be thrown away. That is what should be happening.

But it should not be done through a kangaroo court process which is a political attack by this government on the trade union movement and on the Labor Party. That is what this is all about. The bias is clearly there. Dyson Heydon—this guy who is supposedly a great legal mind—stood up and argued that a fundraiser for the Liberal Party was not a fundraiser. He sat in the royal commission and he protected the biggest crook ever in the trade union movement. He protected her, gave her cover and gave her the inside running. Dyson Heydon is an absolute disgrace and he should go. He should go, his team should go and this royal commission should go. It is a tool of the coalition government to attack its political opponents, and Dyson Heydon is allowing himself to be the main attack weapon set up by this government.

If you are Kathy Jackson, you get a fair go, you get the inside running and you get coached. If you are a former Labor Party Prime Minister, you get attacked and you get a biased commentary made against you. If you are the current leader of the Labor Party, you get attacked. After hundreds of questions that they could not damage the leader of the opposition with, what happened? Dyson Heydon moved in to give the press the grab for the day. This guy is biased. He should go. The royal commission is nothing more than a political tool to attack the trade union movement and the Labor Party. It is biased, it is unacceptable and Dyson Heydon should go. (Time expired)

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of the answers given by Senator Abetz and Senator Brandis to questions asked by Senator Conroy and Senator Cameron. Here we are, as Conroy and Cameron—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie!

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry, Mr Deputy President, Senator Conroy and Senator Cameron are braying about the political bias of the royal commission that is uncovering corruption and improper behaviour of not only the trade union movement and not only trade union officials and their members, but also of third parties. You would think that those opposite would have confidence in the processes that this royal commission is going through and as part of that it will not only be trade unions or trade union officials and members, but there will be third parties so that at the completion of this royal commission we can have confidence that the trade union movement in this country, and indeed those dealing with the trade union movement, are free of corruption. That is something that, I am sure, many members of the trade union movement want to see happen.

Those opposite are braying about the political bias inherent and are trying so hard to undermine the royal commission. They have moved motions in the Senate, but have been unable to get the necessary support. They have tried to ruin the reputation of the eminent Dyson Heydon, the Royal Commissioner. They have attempted to critique quite severely the female witnesses appearing before the commission, and they tried to do that today. But what they cannot run away from is the fact that they are incredibly full of double standards. The Labor Party fails time and time again to notice the beam in its own eye.

I think of Mr Tim Harcourt, who is a commissioner on the fair Work Commission and who is very public in the partisan way that he goes about his daily business. He tweets; he attends Labor Party fundraisers; he goes about it with disregard—it is almost a joy in the way he participates; he goes on The Drum et cetera. He is publicly proud of his association with the Labor Party. He ignores the advice of Justice Ross, who says, 'Pull you head in'—obviously in more legal language than that—and 'You're not in line with the code of conduct of the commission.' He ignores that and continues on his merry partisan way. I have not heard anybody on the other side decry the partisan behaviour and how it undermines the credibility and the trust that the Australian people can have in the Fair Work Commission, because of that particular member's refusal to do the right thing and resign.

When we talk about kangaroo courts, the Labor Party's attack over the last week on Dyson Heydon was nothing short of appalling. They took it to the court of public opinion. I do not think there is a high percentage of the Australian public with a legal background. I do not, and so I would not be an appropriate person to assess the legal arguments as to the facts of the case around Dyson Heydon. I would say the same of the majority of the Australian public. I think Waleed Aly—hardly an apologist for the right—had it right when he said that he thinks that decision should be left in the hands not of the public or of a kangaroo court or subject to the pub test, but it should be left to those with the legal expertise to bring down an opinion in which we can have confidence.

I really wish that those opposite would get on board. Martin Ferguson is; he wants to see the royal commission do its work in uncovering corruption on both sides of the argument so that once again Australians on both sides of the political or ideological divide can have confidence that the workers in Australia are being appropriately represented, that their funds are not being squirrelled away in slush funds, that their union officials are not beating up on female investigators with the Fair Work Commission and that their representatives are not bullying workers in their own workplace. When we look at what the royal commission has already uncovered in its work—and we look forward to seeing the third party decisions—we should all get on board and support it.

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to take note of the answers given by Senator Abetz and Senator Brandis to questions asked by Senator Conroy and Senator Cameron. The Abbott government's royal commission into trade unions has never been about weeding out corruption and it has never been about improving unions. What it was and what it continues to be—

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Have you seen the list?

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

is a direct attempt to attack political rivals and increase Mr Abbott's electoral prospects in the next election. Since the day it gained the keys to the ministerial wing, the Abbott government has waged a concerted and vicious campaign against Australian workers and the organisations that support them, including the Australian Labor Party—

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why are you sticking up for them?

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Abbott government has tried to smear its way into another term of government by using $80 million of taxpayers' money on a thoroughly compromised royal commission. Failing on fundamental tests of competence and economic management, Tony Abbott launched a politically motivated witch hunt to impugn the reputation of the unions and of the Labor Party. Knowing that he would not be able to win the argument on substantive issues of policy and the future direction of this country, Mr Abbott decided to play dirty instead.

Last month we saw evidence of just how conflicted this royal commission is—when we heard that the Royal Commissioner himself, Dyson Heydon, agreed to be the star speaker at a Liberal party function. The invitation clearly showed that funds from the event would be funnelled into the Liberals' election campaigning. Clearly, any reasonable person would have difficulty believing that a man who has agreed to be a star speaker at a party political event does not have an affinity with that party. Then we had the absurd situation of Mr Heydon ruling on whether Mr Heydon could be perceived by a reasonable person to be biased. Sadly, in his ruling, Mr Heydon ignored the advice—

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Have you read it?

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

that Mr Heydon himself had provided not too long ago in a similar situation. In the case of British American Tobacco Australia Services Limited v Laurie, Mr Heydon wrote:

It is fundamental to the administration of justice that the judge be neutral. It is for this reason that the appearance of departure from neutrality is a ground of disqualification, because the rule is concerned with the appearance of bias and not the actuality. It is the perception of the hypothetical observer that provides the yardstick.

This was great advice from Mr Heydon, but it is a shame that he did not take heed of that advice.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Have you read his decision?

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But it gets worse. Not only is there a pall over the motivations and political affinities of the royal commissioner himself, but today we have heard a very concerning report about the special treatment given to Prime Minister Abbott's star witness, Kathy Jackson. Let's not forget some of the comments of senior Liberal members about Ms Jackson—Prime Minister Tony Abbott himself said:

Kathy Jackson is speaking up for the right and she deserves a bit of support from the leader of our country.

Christopher Pyne said that Ms Jackson 'will be remembered as a transforming union leader'. Senator Abetz said: 'She did have the courage to blow the whistle and in those circumstances she is to be applauded'. Let's not forget that this is the same Kathy Jackson that the Federal Court has found to have defrauded HSU members of $1.4 billion.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Billion?

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Million dollars. Last week we knew that Ms Jackson was treated with kid gloves by the commission—a very different experience from that which other unionists received. But today we have heard the appalling extent of her special treatment. Not only did the commission give Ms Jackson an easy ride; she was actually given an extensive briefing on the issues that were to be raised in the hearings. The royal commission's lawyers gave advance warning of its strategies and the issues that would be canvassed. She knew what she would be asked; she knew what she would not be asked; she even received advice that she should use her time on the stand to respond to her critics. These are absolutely damning revelations that go to the very heart of the integrity of the commission.

Labor has been very clear from the outset that we want to see an end to corruption and we want to see strong action on illegal activity. But a politically motivated, morally compromised and mortally tainted royal commission is not the way to do it. Clearly there could be no doubt in the eyes of any reasonable person that Mr Heydon's position is now untenable and the royal commission is nothing but an expensive, taxpayer-funded witch-hunt to the tune of $80 million of taxpayer money. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.