Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer outline how an efficient and productive construction sector promotes economic growth and creates jobs for hardworking Australians? What is the government doing to ensure that investment in infrastructure and other major projects across Australia is not threatened by lawlessness and dysfunction in the building industry?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for her question, because she knows—representing the great state of Western Australia, and a very, very large part of it—just how important efficiency and productivity in the building and construction industry is, particularly to the mining and resources sector. Some $114 billion is the value of the work done in our non-residential construction and engineering construction industry in Australia. And we know that as a result of the lawlessness in the building and construction industry—which is defended by those opposite—the estimates of the increase in costs on investment, which costs jobs and costs wages, is another 30 per cent on top of that, which drives investment away from this country. Today we note that some $100 million in projects—which include the Wheatstone project, which the member is very familiar with— some $29 billion; the Gorgon project—$8 billion, and the North West Shelf LNG site—$2 billion—all affected by the lawlessness and practices of the unions, which are endorsed and sponsored by those who sit opposite by refusing to support the Australian Building and Construction Commission being restored—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer will resume his seat. The member for Moreton on a point of order.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker—

Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McEwen will cease interjecting. I am trying to hear the member for Moreton—he knows that; he is about two feet from him. I am watching the member for Moreton. I am not looking across the other side of the chamber. If the member for McEwen does not wish me to hear the member for Moreton, I will happily move on.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, under standing order 92(a)(ii): I consider it offensive that the Treasurer would suggest I support lawlessness on any building site. I would ask that the Treasurer veer away from that.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Moreton has heard my rulings on the robust nature of question time before. Whilst the member is entitled to make that point of order, if I upheld that there would not be many questions asked, and I do not think the member for Moreton's colleagues would be pleased with him.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the member for Moreton is feeling so aggrieved, they can send back the $11 million that the CFMEU sent to those opposite. That is what they can do if they feel so aggrieved and offended at the suggestion about their refusing to support the Australian Building and Construction Commission being returned: send back the cash. But they will not. They will hold onto it.

But there was a Labor leader who understood that there is a line that has to be drawn when we see the sort of offensive and lawless behaviour that we have seen in the construction sector. It was Prime Minister Hawke, who said this in January of this year:

The unions need to clean up their act and get their house in order … It just is appalling. I mean, I wouldn't tolerate it.

That is what Prime Minister Hawke said; he said he would not tolerate it. Mr Hawke said:

You know what I did with the Builders Labourers Federation—I would throw them out.

This Leader of the Opposition stands with the lawlessness in the building and construction industry and calls them the side of the angels. That is what he does. But an example has been set by former Prime Minister Hawke which he should follow. But we know he will not, because Prime Minister Hawke had the strength which this Leader of the Opposition does not have. He does not have the wit or the stomach to stand up to the union movement, which pulls his chain. He has always had his chain pulled by the union movement, and here they are leading him around the policy environment as he refuses to stand up as previous Labor leaders would stand up—but not this one. This is a weak Leader of the Opposition who does not have the ticker to be able to address these serious issues. So, no, they will not send the $11 million back. They will not deal with the serious issues of making union officials deal with the same accountability as company directors. (Time expired)