Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

Quite apart from cleaning up criminality, fixing building and construction in Australia, fixing that industry, is good for our economy and it is good for productivity, which makes it good for jobs and growth. The last time the Australian Building and Construction Commission was in existence, under the former minister for industrial relations, the member for Warringah, productivity in building and construction improved by over nine per cent. Consumers were $7½ billion a year better off annually and there were fewer days lost through industrial action because of the Australian Building and Construction Commission. The Leader of the Opposition decided, when he was the minister, to scrap the ABCC and turn his back on all of those opportunities for jobs and growth that had been created by the member for Warringah.

We now have an opportunity to remedy that error on the part of the Leader of the Opposition and we have the chance to bring back the Australian Building and Construction Commission to help jobs and growth. Do not just take my word for it; this is what Justice Haydon said in his royal commission report. Justice Haydon said:

The sustained and entrenched disregard for both industrial and criminal laws shown by the country’s largest construction union further supports the need—

for a separate building industry regulator to enforce the law within the sector. Further, he said:

Given the high level of unlawful activity within the building and construction sector, it is desirable to have a regulator tasked solely with enforcing the law within that sector.

This is the fourth royal commission in 40 years—the Winneke royal commission in 1982, the Giles royal commission in 1992, the Cole royal commission in 2003 and now the Haydon royal commission in 2015-16—that has recommended a specific regulator to clean up the building and construction industry. This side of the House wants to do it. The Labor Party is leading the opposition to it. Why on earth could they be against it? You would think that they would want to get this monkey off their back. (Time expired)

See this speech in context