Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment, Senator Cash. Is the minister aware of any recent reports about payments between employers and registered organisations?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unfortunately, yet again I am. Today we saw yet another concerning report of questionable arrangements between the SDA—

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

Another one?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Another one, Senator Brandis—and employers Coles and Woolworths. Ewan Hannan has revealed today that, in exchange for Coles and Woolworths collecting membership fees of SDA union members, the SDA then gives back to Coles and Woolworths a so-called administration fee of 10 per cent. What this means is that 10 per cent of these union members' membership fees goes straight back to their employer. The question then becomes, though: what does the SDA or the employer actually get for this exchange? Well, nobody knows, because, until recently, nobody actually knew of this little transaction. Let's do the math. SDA members can pay up to $500 per year in membership fees to the SDA, and $50 of that $500 then goes back to Coles or Woolies. All I can say there is: it must be a very, very complex deduction process to cost 10 per cent of the membership fees. But, in terms of the bigger picture, this is just another example of concern about the financial deals that are being done between big unions and big employers. As I informed the Senate last week, union membership has now been in free fall for many, many years, and yet, when you look at their asset base, $1.5 billion, and their revenue stream, $900 million, you have to ask: where does the money come from?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Smith, a supplementary question.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the minister describe what concerns have been raised about these and similar financial arrangements?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The key concern about these payments is that they benefit union officials—for example, like Mr Bill Shorten—but do nothing to benefit the membership of the union who are paying their hard-earned membership fees. In the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption, this comment was made:

A cause for increasing concern over the last two decades is the growth of other forms of more sophisticated, and less transparent, fund raising activities by some trade union officials … The moneys may be raised for the personal advancement of the officials, and not for the union.

In relation to personal advancement, as we know, Mr Bill Shorten traded away penalty rates, negotiated deals for his workers that paid below awards and, at the same time, saw a complex web of moneys donated to his union—hardly a proper use of members' funds.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Smith, a final supplementary question.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the minister outline what actions the Turnbull government is taking to increase accountability in registered organisations?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Despite those opposite fighting us every single step of the way, we are very proud, on this side of the chamber, to have increased accountability and transparency for registered organisations, regardless of whether you are an employer organisation or a union organisation. What we do on this side is all about putting members first. It is critical that these organisations, in particular in relation to the amount of funds they control and the fact that they pay no tax, put their members first. They need to come clean about their financial arrangements. The $132 million of funds that flow into union coffers from workers entitlement funds, income protection funds, training funds and charity funds needs to be explained. The members in these funds need to know how this flow of funds benefits them and, if it doesn't, why not.