Jo Lindgren (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Today in this house we saw a motion about a respected member of the legal fraternity that has placed the Senate in unconstitutional territory. The exposed corruption and vile behaviour of the union movement has been displayed for all to view at the breakfast table, at the barbecues of our households and in living rooms around the nation—and the workers of Australia are disgusted. What do the Labor Party do in the face of the massive backlash from ripped-off employees and broken employers? They go after the head of the inquiry that is exposing them and they try to irreparably blemish his name and shut down the instrument that will deny them campaign funds in the future.

I noted last Monday that the comments from the ACTU boss, Dave Oliver, included the words, 'The royal commission is terminally tarnished.' I think that when he spoke those words he was in fact referring to the labour movement in Australia. 'Terminally tarnished' is exactly how the union movement looks, thanks to the findings so far of the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption. The debate that we find ourselves in today is reminiscent of the protection rackets that were run on the streets of Chicago in the 1920s—the cash cow must be protected at all times. Just substitute whisky and mafia with unions and the Australian Labor Party. Those opposite have no choice but to attempt to shut down the very thing that will make them irrelevant—the financial arm of the ALP: the union movement.    Those opposite realise that this inquiry may very well see them being exiled into distant memory, much like the thugs of those vicious Chicago days. That is why Labor chose to play the man. They always choose to play the man.    When it comes to the harsh reality of explaining the abhorrent actions of their union comrades, the earthy tones of Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel spring to mind:

Hello darkness, my old friend

I've come to talk with you again.

The Labor Party keep regurgitating the words 'politically motivated witch hunt' in reference to this royal commission. Nothing could be further from the truth. This commission has been welcomed by Labor luminaries such as Paul Howes and Martin Ferguson. Those opposite are the provedores and purveyors of the cheap and nasty when it comes to beating up their opponents via political means. As of today, you can even include a witness at a royal commission.

I ask those here tonight to cast back in their memories to the chamber on Tuesday, 30 September 2014. On that day Senator Lazarus moved a motion to start a Senate enquiry into the Queensland LNP government—a political witch-hunt. What was the voting regarding that motion? Those opposite have articulately stated they do not support political witch-hunts. So let's recall the vote. Who wants to take a trip down memory lane here? The vote was 30 to 27 in favour. I cast my eye down the list and there was not one ALP name listed as being against that political witch-hunt—not one. I was not here on that day, but I bet my colleagues were completely shocked. They were so shocked that they called a division. We sit here and hear the ALP state that they do not approve of political witch-hunts. My colleagues concluded that there had obviously been a mistake in the recording of the votes. But—surprise, surprise!—after the division there were still zero ALP names that had voted against a political witch-hunt. How hypocritical was that, and what a disgrace it was to the proceedings of the Senate.

Here today we see yet again that the Australian Labor Party are simply intent on dragging this great chamber through the vile entrails of their own making to extract some type of perverted revenge for their corrupt union mates. Frankly, this disgusts me. The howls of indignation from those opposite about the Hon. Dyson Heydon AC QC are an attempt to distract and detract from the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption. Those opposite are afraid of what may be uncovered, and rightfully so. After all, some clangers have come out of this royal commission. I am aware that some of my colleagues have already highlighted them, but I am going to go through them again so that everyone in this chamber can hear them once more.

You could not dream up things like this—for example, CFMEU officials Brian Parker and Darren Greenfield consorting with underworld crime figures, standover men, bikies, career criminals and jihadists; Comancheros being used as debt collectors; and Bill Shorten accepting a $40,000 donation from construction companies to pay the wages of his election campaign director in 2007—